Eisspeedway

Talk:Busan

Initial text

The information in the article is relevant, but correct grammar is not used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.143.204 (talk) 20:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

I believe that user Luccas is coming dangerously close to violating the 3-revert rule. His vandalism of my edits, changing the name Pusan to the nonsense word "Busan" is beginning to get ridiculous. I wish he would stop and realize that this is the English language Wikipedia, not the Korean language version.


Who are you?? If you really have done some edits on Busan please log on your account and restate your objection, because there are no contribution on this article done by 205.203.136.135. In the mean time I would appreciate if you read the following articles:

Luccas 09:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it would be a good idea to add, “formerly known as Pusan”? Similar to “It was formerly known in English as Peking or Peiking [English Pronunciation]” on the Beijing article. I know on a lot of older maps, and history books you’ll still see Pusan, and this could lead to confusion. I didn’t realize they changed the Romanization, I know it’s a bit of a PITA with Hangul. - Mefanch 22:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Busan

the correct romanisation is Busan.

In english (which this is an english article) the name of the city is pusan. THIS MUST BE CHANGED the name may be busan in some other language but it is officially pusan in the english language

This is incorrect. The official name of this city in the English language is Busan. The official site of the city [1] has no mention of Busan other than for perhaps educational institutions (for which romanization of their names have been unchanged, so both Busan and Pusan can be seen on this page). Also, please refer to the brief by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism here. It is my belief that the official name is none other than Busan following the promulgation of the Revised Romanization of Korean in 2000. pencil_ethics 13:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that regardless of which system of transliteration of Korean into English is preferred, the use of Busan is making the article very inconsistent. There are references to "Pusan National University", for example. I suspect that until the new romanization system gains greater acceptance, "Pusan" should be used. Additionally -- should other articles be changed? (See, e.g., Pusan Perimeter, Pusan National University. I think a reference to the fact at the beginning of the article that Pusan is also spelled "Busan" would be sufficient for now. Please let's not get into an immature argument over this, eh? 67.171.68.188 01:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the inconsistency. "Pusan National University" is the name of that (distinguished) university; calling it "Busan National University" would simply be incorrect. The Pusan Perimeter is a more complicated case, but here Wikipedia:Use common names would seem to apply. "Pusan Perimeter" is a historical term, and if historians are a bit retrograde in their choice of romanization that shouldn't come as a surprise. Cheers, -- Visviva 10:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with Visviva's position on this matter. In any case, following the promulgation of the Revised Romanization, all locality names in English were updated accordingly (i.e. Inchon => Incheon, Kwangju => Gwangju, etc.) and Busan is not exempt. In fact, it is notable that neither the Incheon or Gwangju articles have discussions in the talk page about the correct romanization. pencil_ethics 13:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One additional point of note: neither the Incheon or Gwangju articles mention the former names. pencil_ethics 13:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The current condition of the article is unfortunate. I strongly suggest that the name of the city be expressed in the article text according to Wikipedia conventions. In the current state of the article, as of the date of this post, a number of spellings are being used concurrently. What's going on here? Mumun 無文 12:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also go with Busan. When the Korean Government adopted the Revised Romanization in 2000 it spent a great deal of money to immeditely instore the new system. So it's with the rest of the world that the new romanization system is slow to gain greater acceptance. — Luccas 15:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article is the subject of periodic and patterned vandalism regarding romanisation of Busan. I think it clear that, with a few exceptions listed above, romanisation should follow the Revised romanisation of July 2000 following Wikipedia convention. However, in order to avoid revert wars and trollish behaviour as per WP:Troll, let's be gracious and patient (esp. with anon. IPs), give obvious but mild warnings, and practice slow reverts if possible. However, we need to be very firm with those who ignore logic and policy. It is vandalism to repeatedly insert 'Pusan' according to Wikipedia policy, so let's report repeat offenders and similar IPs to the persistent vandalism board. Then if they cause a fuss, we can refer their behaviour to the incident board -- Mumun 無文 11:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a big deal is it? I gets redirected here anyways. Kingj123 (talk) 04:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Population "...could be as high as XX.."

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and so there will be no guessing or estimating what Busan's population might be given X circumstance. The passage that attempted to guess what some population "might be" or "could be" was removed. Here we are to use only the most current data from the current national census. Please check Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. However, and somebody please correct me if I am wrong, we could add the official census populations of Busan, Gimhae, and Yangsan together and use that as an unofficial figure somewhere in the text. Mumun 無文 10:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using info from Wikipedia I added the populations of Gimhae, Yangsan, and Busan together and get 4,287,991. This is somewhat lower than the number that previously appeared in the text. Mumun 無文 22:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning?

When did the name Busan/Pusan come about, and what does it mean? That is to say, why is the city called iron kettle (釜) mountain (山)? This would be interesting and useful information. LordAmeth (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should have links to nonexisting articles in the introduction. It looks unprofessional and contributes to Wikipedia having a bad reputation. 210.117.246.250 (talk) 01:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History section

This section should be expand considering Busan in South Korea's 2nd largest city. It's very important city for Korea. --Korsentry 05:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism section

Busan is also the popular tourist destination for Japanese & Russian because of close proximity and being largest port access point for Korea. Please expand it. --Korsentry 05:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fusan

= the name of Busan during the Japanese rule Böri (talk) 15:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Area???

I'm noticing this in every Korean city article I'm searching up. Inconsistencies. The Busan city home page places the area at 765.64km2, the Busan article places the area at 765.94km2. What is the area??? --Exec. Tassadar (comments, contribs) 10:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two or Three cities?

The article lists three cities not captured by the Japanese and yet says that two cities were not captured. This is an obvious contradiction. And why does every Korean page contain so much rampant nationalism and bias? You guys are literally arguing over a single letter... P or B... By the way... Its a B, I was just there last weekend and its spelled with a B virtually everywhere you go! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.60.70.39 (talk) 05:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Educate yourself. It's the English speaking person, who probably spelled Busan with Pusan. Please think before posting. Korean language is not harsh sounding. It's Gim not Kim. Ask a Korean person for the right pronunciation, go to Korea for Korean food, before you judge how Korean food tastes. The food is much better than in the states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.2.78 (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

I'm probably not the first to suggest it, but I propose we move "Busan" to "Pusan". The vast majority of Wikipedia articles refer to the city as Pusan. To wit: Pusan International Film Festival, Battle of the Pusan Perimeter, Pusan National University, Pusan University of Foreign Studies, Pusan Film Critics Awards, etc. Also, most maps, encylcopedia, and web pages refer to it as Pusan. I say move. What say you? RM (Be my friend) — Preceding undated comment added 20:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support:
  • Oppose:

I don't accept to move "Busan to "Pusan"

I don't agree with Reenem. We should use the Revised Romanization of Korean because that's the official romanization of South Korea. Lee, Eungki C. (talk) 13:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support moving "Busan" to "Pusan"

I agree with Reenem. The Revised Romanization has been adopted by South Korean government and thus can regulate the use of English only within S. Korea. The rest of the world still use "Pusan". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.248.23.250 (talk) 11:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So [{Kaliningrad]] stays Königsberg in other languages just because change isn't necessary? --88.64.181.143 (talk) 22:15, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Expand?

We should expand Busan by adding more references and sections. Is it okay to add the section "Population"? If somebody is not answering me for a week, I'll do it myself. I post this on April 7, 2012 according to the US time. Lee, Eungki C. (talk) 13:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't wait, I'll do it my self. Lee, Eungki C. (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some Request

Someone should add some of these images as the first 3 are relating to the history of Busan.

Busan it the early 1900's
1940's Busan City Hall
Transition to modernization in Busan around the 1930's
A Seomyeon station entrance in Busan
An entrance to Busan National University
Sasang station entrance
Sport Complex station entrance
부산 APEC에서의 정상들-translation needed
Busan Firework Festival 2008

I strongly suggest to have some of those included in the article, and to put the images relating to tourism on the be on the tourism section in a gallery. Nice Stranger5810 (talk) 14:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nice Stranger5810 I will try placing some up. Are the pictures yours? Cause if it is, maybe a barnstar would be my offer. Thanks for the contribution. HanSangYoon (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some Demographic changes...

The article is in need of a "Demographics" section. I could do this by my self but it should not be removed unless if there is a reason. I'll wait for a day to edit this article, I hope there will be a fast reply or no reply as normal. Nice Stranger5810 (talk) 11:35, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain why there's not a flag for this city?

I see other cities or counties in Wikipedia with flags. Can someone find a flag for this city "Dynamic Busan", and place it up here? Mucho appreciation. HanSangYoon (talk) 01:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Busan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Busan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Busan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:56, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Busan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:06, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 December 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 14:13, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Busan → Pusan – I understand that there has been some inconclusive discussion about how to title this page (I myself went looking for "Pusan" today and when I was redirected to "Busan" I was certain that this was an error!). According to WP:COMMONNAME we should title our articles by the name that the subject is most commonly known by, even in preference to a subject's official name, so long as that name is the one used in published reliable sources-- do not the majority of published reliable English sources use "Pusan"? To the extent that this is so, should we not move this article to that namespace? To support this proposed move, which any editor is welcome to do, please edit this page and scroll to the bottom and add a new line of text by typing * '''Support''' I support this proposal and here are my reasons. ~~~~. To oppose, do the same thing but type "Oppose" rather than "Support". Thank you. A loose necktie (talk) 17:53, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: You are right, WP:COMMONNAME states that articles should be named based on what the majority of reliable sources refer to them as, and the majority of English sources refer to the city as "Busan", not "Pusan". So this article should reflect that. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 21:53, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move. It doesn't look like Pusan's the common name anymore. Let's keep it at the status quo. O.N.R. (talk) 04:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Most of the shipping resources use Busan. Fob.schools (talk) 13:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox pics

Write the names of the places shown in pics of infobox.Success think (talk) 18:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clutter

In the first half of the article the right side of the page is looking really cluttered for me. Can someone find a way to reorganize or prune it? toobigtokale (talk) 11:00, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Most of the pictures and one box belong to history and and names section, but the chart and city view belong to Geography and climate, I honestly cannot rearrange them in a good way.
Side note: Isn't that time to make an archive of this talk page?PAper GOL (talk) 20:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That population box was in the wrong place I moved it to the demographics section.PAper GOL (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

boda de shacty so in soo

boda 2806:2F0:9000:FD8C:4C83:4B2B:ACF4:DF10 (talk) 16:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Busan